Mohamed ElBaradei visited the United States last week and spoke at two universities where I teach, Harvard and Tufts, in the city of Boston. There, ElBaradei met with the Egyptian expatriate community, who eagerly rushed from cities across the East Coast to see a man who gives them hope that change and reform might indeed occur in their mother country.
ElBaradei repeated the message he has been delivering since returning to Egypt in February: Change has become an urgent necessity if we wish to save Egypt from the quagmire into which it has sunk over the last few years. This sad fact is attested to by various international human development reports. One such report indicates that Egypt has dropped to 125 on a list of 131 countries in terms of overall development. Similarly, 42 percent of Egyptians now live below the poverty line, meaning that more than 33 million Egyptians live on less than two dollars a day.
As ElBaradei stresses, conditions in Egypt must be changed from the ground up. In order to eliminate poverty, there must be educational reform along with improved competitiveness of the Egyptian labor force. Since the ruling regime has largely failed at such tasks, it must be changed by peaceful means through free and fair elections. This, in turn, first requires that the Constitution be amended, particularly articles that govern the election process, such as Articles 76, 77 and 88. Only then can free and fair elections be held under national and international supervision by local and international civil society organizations.
Although ElBaradei may not be the most charismatic political figure, everyone who heard him speak in Boston and New York praised his poise and level-headedness, in addition to the honesty and skill with which he responded to questions. He did not dodge questions or equivocate in his responses, and came off as modest and honest even while describing the failure and corruption of the ruling regime in Egypt.
Of course, not all of ElBaradei’s responses satisfied his listeners, especially those relating to a contingency plan which would allow him and others to be nominated for president even if the constitutional amendments are not secured. Egyptians living in the West have learned that for every plan there should be a contingency plan. If Plan A fails, then one resorts to the alternative, Plan B. But ElBaradei did not inform his listeners of any Plan B, either because he doesn’t have one or because he has not prepared one yet. As such, the man gave some people the impression that he is calling on Egyptians to take action without becoming fully engaged in the struggle himself.
Others present said that ElBaradei spoke to their minds but not to their hearts. Some said the “cautious tone” that characterized his words reflected the 30 years he had spent in Egyptian and international diplomatic capacities, but that now he needed to act like a politician. While a diplomat avoids being swayed by emotion and chooses his words carefully, a politician must take risks and speak to people’s consciences. Politics requires stimulating the imagination and driving people to work toward lofty goals. As ElBaradei has repeated since returning to Egypt in February, he cannot affect change alone, and needs all Egyptians to participate in this fight.
ElBaradei was asked about the organizational system that he depends on and the financial resources available to him which will enable him to fight this great battle. Surprisingly, he has neither. He has no organizational or financial resources with which to run a campaign. He conceded that he had reservations about accepting donations for his campaign, but he invites Egyptians to collect donations on his behalf. Similarly he called on Egyptian-Americans to remember the freedom and affluence that they enjoy as part of the diaspora, suggesting they run newspaper advertisements calling for political reform in Egypt.
Egyptians who attended the public and private meetings wondered if he would take to the streets and lead demonstrations demanding the implementation of the seven reforms enshrined in the National Coalition for Change’s charter. They asked whether ElBaradei will become an example for those citizens that have responded to his call? Is this not what other leaders did in Egypt, such as Saad Zaghloul and his compatriots that were subjected to prison and exile? Is this not what Gandhi did in India, what Nelson Mandela did in South Africa, what Vaclav Havel did in Czechelslovakia and Mohamed Khatami did in Iran?
Perhaps ElBaradei is not a fighter like Che Guevara, Ho Chi Minh or Hassan Nasrallah. But is he ready to engage in the peaceful civil disobedience that he calls for? Is he ready to break laws that are unconstitutional and unjust, even if that means risking detention or prison? Is this not what happened to Martin Luther King Jr.? King continued to struggle until the civil rights movement emerged victorious, which in turn allowed an American man of African origins like Barack Obama to occupy the most powerful position in the country.
Indeed, these questions place great challenges and responsibilities on ElBaradei’s shoulders. Is he qualified to meet these challenges and responsibilities? By the time he returns to Egypt, will he have found suitable answers to these questions? In other words, does he have a Plan B or C or D if the regime does not allow Plan A to succeed?
Translated from the Arabic Edition.
